Work-related stress among sworn and non-sworn law enforcement personnel

Abstract

Sworn law enforcement personnel in the United States face high rates of work-related stress. Yet, the well-being of more than 300,000 non-sworn personnel, particularly regarding work-related trauma and stress, remains underexplored. This study aims to test the hypothesis that non-sworn personnel experience lower levels of stress, comparing stress and probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) between sworn and non-sworn personnel. The study recruited 283 sworn and 85 non-sworn personnel from two large urban law enforcement agencies in the Twin Cities, Minnesota, between May and October 2021, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic and the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd. Participants completed an online survey measuring perceived work-related stress (organizational and operational) and PTSD validated by PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) questionnaire. The study considered different intensities of exposure to COVID and civil unrest, demographics, and worker characteristics as covariates in linear regression models, comparing stress outcomes among sworn and non-sworn personnel. The results showed no significant difference in operational and organizational stress levels between groups, except regarding pension eligibility (non-sworn < 5 years, sworn < 10 years). Non-sworn personnel not yet pension-eligible reported lower organizational stress (β = −10.1, CI = −18.84, −1.36). PCL-5 scores averaged 20.2 ± 17.4 for sworn and 23.6 ± 19.1 for non-sworn personnel, indicating no significant difference in probable PTSD (β = 3.24, CI = −4.19, 10.67). Both groups experienced similar stress levels, though non-sworn personnel ineligible for pension benefits showed lower organizational stress. These findings underscore the importance of targeted interventions and enhanced mental health services for all law enforcement personnel, regardless of classification.

Introduction

Law enforcement is regarded as one of the most stressful occupations in the USA (Anshel, 2000; National Institute of Justice, 2019; U.S. Department of Justice, 2019; Violanti et al., 2006). Studies have shown post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suicidal ideation, and depression to be two to three times higher in law enforcement than in other occupations and the general US population (Hartley et al., 2011; Syed et al., 2020; Violanti, 2014; Violanti et al., 2008). Among these outcomes, PTSD is particularly severe among law enforcement with rates as high as 19% (Carlier et al., 1997; Gersons, 1989; Maia et al., 2007; Robinson et al., 1997). These high levels of mental health problems have been attributed to work-related stress, which is defined as “harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of the worker” (Sauter et al., 2014: 6). Stress responses commonly arise from two broad types of work-related stressors experienced in law enforcement: operational and organizational (McCreary et al., 2017; Sauter et al., 2014).

Organizational stressors operate within an agency and reflect work culture, and include excessive administrative responsibilities, negative leadership style, lack of social support, lack of training, restrictive policies, and staff shortages (Leone and Keel, 2016; McCreary and Thompson, 2006; Tuttle et al., 2018; Violanti and Aron, 1995; Violanti et al., 2018). Operational stressors are duty-related and include responding to violent crimes, extended workloads, exposure to death, negative public perception, and daily encounters with various situations that threaten worker safety (McCreary and Thompson, 2006; National Institute of Justice, 2019; U.S. Department of Justice, 2019).

Although law enforcement agencies nationwide have allocated resources to address the effects of work-related stress, civilians who fill non-sworn positions have been largely overlooked (Brouzos et al., 2021; Dantzer, 1987; Laufs and Waseem, 2020; Stogner et al., 2020). Non-sworn positions typically carry out job tasks to reduce the demands on police services by providing clerical and administrative assistance through specialized roles like correctional workers, crime scene investigators, forensic technicians, and 911 dispatchers (Kiedrowski et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2021). Sworn positions are typically police officers, sheriff deputies, state troopers, or detectives, where the core job duties include having the power to arrest, carry a firearm and visible badge, and directly respond to emergency calls (Kiedrowski et al., 2019). In the past 20 years, law enforcement agencies in the USA have expanded to include over 300,000 civilians to optimize agency resources, carry out community engagement initiatives, and provide administrative support to allow sworn officers to prioritize operational law enforcement duties (Kiedrowski et al., 2019; U.S. Department of Justice - Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2020). The use of civilian employees allows agencies to expand the role of non-sworn positions to include job tasks that had been under the work scope of sworn personnel. The expanding role of civilians in law enforcement agencies has, in turn, exposed non-sworn personnel to stressors commonly experienced by officers, including long hours, shift work, exposure to traumatic scenes of death and violence, encountering verbal abuse and physical assaults, and contact with hazardous materials and blood-borne pathogens (Spence et al., 2019; Violanti, 2014).

Despite civilians filling more non-sworn positions, non-sworn personnel commonly do not receive the same resources to manage work-related stress as their counterparts. The majority of stress reduction services primarily target sworn personnel because they make up the largest group in any agency, and are perceived as experiencing more stress than non-sworn personnel (Finn and Tomz, 1996; NORA Public Safety Council, 2019). Efforts to support sworn officers are largely driven by the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act, which expanded services for 800,000 federal, state, local, and tribal sworn officers (Spence et al., 2019). Although this policy is justifiable, non-sworn employees, who are not covered under this Act, also operate within high-stress work environments and contend with the potential effects of trauma (Carleton et al., 2018; Kiedrowski et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2021; Sewell and Crew, 1984; U.S. Department of Justice, 2019; U.S. Department of Justice - Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2020).

Little is known about how the stressors experienced by non-sworn personnel compare with those experienced by sworn personnel (e.g., patrol officers) (Ramey et al., 2016; Waters, 2007). Non-sworn law enforcement personnel, although not directly involved in frontline policing or public-facing duties, are nonetheless exposed to a range of similar stressors working in close proximity to police officers that can lead to vicarious trauma. This study also comes at a time marked by a significant shift in the landscape of law enforcement because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd. These events have likely exacerbated the existing stress levels experienced by both sworn and non-sworn personnel, imposing novel operational and organizational stressors that are very unique to this particular event and time. Given this context, this study sought to test the following hypotheses to further advance law enforcement stress research:

H1 Non-sworn personnel will experience lower levels of work-related stress than sworn personnel.

H2 The prevalence of probable PTSD will be lower among non-sworn personnel than sworn personnel.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was implemented with two large urban police and sheriff departments in Minnesota. A 130-item web-based survey was developed and REDCap was used for data collection and management (Harris et al., 2009). Recruitment and data collection were conducted from May to October 2021. Information about the study was sent to all employees of the two law enforcement agencies through their workplace email accounts with a web link to the survey, a study description, and instructions. Participants completed an online consent form and reviewed the Tennessen Warning, a government notice that legally states that the department will not collect, store, or disseminate private or confidential data for purposes other than those specified in the study.

Measurements

Work-related stressors.

The Police Stress Questionnaire (PSQ) was used to investigate sources of stress in policing (Galanis et al., 2019; Irniza et al., 2014; McCreary and Thompson, 2006). The PSQ consists of two 20-item subscales assessing operational (PSQ-Op) stressors and organizational (PSQ-Org) stressors. Items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 “No Stress at All” to 7 “A Lot of Stress” over the past six months. The PSQ-Op subscale assesses stressors related to shift work, traumatic events, and negative comments from the public. The PSQ-Org subscale assesses inadequate equipment, staff shortages, and dealing with co-workers. The PSQ displayed high internal consistency on both subscales (Cronbach’s α = 0.93_op, 0.91_org) in this study. The PSQ-Op and PSQ-Org were analyzed as continuous variables, with higher scores indicating greater perceived operational and organizational work stress.

Work-related PTSD.

The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) was used to screen individuals for symptom severity for PTSD in the past month (Blevins et al., 2015; Bovin et al., 2016). The PCL-5 is a 20-item self-report questionnaire measuring Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) symptoms of PTSD with item responses on a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 0 “Not at All” to 4 “Extremely”. The PCL-5 displayed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.96) in this study. All respondents were asked to report whether the very stressful experience they reported on for the PCL-5 was in regard to the specific work-related event with a yes/no response. Among those who responded (n = 294), 71% reported the very stressful experience to be work-related (n = 209). The PCL-5 was analyzed as a continuous variables, with higher scores indicating PTSD symptom severity.

Job classification.

Job classification was self-reported by the question prompt, “What best described your job at the department?” with the following categorical responses: (1) sworn/licensed or (2) non-sworn/non-licensed.

Lifestyle characteristics, demographics, COVID-19 infections, and civil unrest.

Participants reported their gender, ethnicity, marital status, number of children, law enforcement department location, history of being in the US Armed Forces, and second job status. The study took place in the Minneapolis/Saint Paul area during the COVID-19 pandemic and approximately one year after George Floyd’s murder and the civil unrest.

During the data collection period from May to October 2021, Minnesota was under various COVID-19 measures aimed at controlling the spread of the virus. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced new work-related stressors for law enforcement personnel at a time when their services were crucial (Stogner et al., 2020). In protecting public safety, law enforcement officers faced increased exposure to COVID-19 through direct contact with suspected or confirmed cases of the virus. According to Stogner et al., these unique stressors included fear of contracting and transmitting the virus to family members, as well as lack of personal protective equipment to reduce the spread of COVID-19 (Stogner et al., 2020). The impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement likely increased work-related stress to an inherently stressful profession, raising concerns about its potential impact on the health and well-being of law enforcement personnel (Jennings and Perez, 2020; Stogner et al., 2020).

In addition, the pandemic coincided with escalated racial tensions and a public outcry for police reform following the murder of George Floyd, a 46-year-old African American man, by a Minnesota police officer. This amplified existing stress levels inherent to law enforcement work. The resulting civil unrest in Minneapolis, Minnesota further strained the relationship between the public and law enforcement, leading to negative public perceptions and heightened scrutiny of law enforcement practices. Law enforcement personnel employed during this period were exposed to traumatic scenes of burning buildings, looting, verbal threats, smoke bombs, rubber bullets, and tear gas during unrest across Minnesota following Floyd’s death, which drew national attention. Unforeseen and large chaotic gatherings such as civil unrest have been cited as among the most stressful duties faced by law enforcement personnel (Garbarino et al., 2012). Following the murder of George Floyd, nearly 200 Minneapolis police officers applied to leave the department because of PTSD resulting in the highest number of claims filed in the past decade (Collins, 2021; Eligon, 2020).

Recognizing that these novel events represent significant stressors with varying degrees of exposure among individuals, the study aimed to assess levels of work-related stress and PTSD among sworn and non-sworn personnel. To achieve this, we differentiated between levels of exposure to these stressors rather than treating them as uniform background factors. Specifically, we considered the intensity of exposure to COVID-19 by asking participants whether they had tested positive for the virus. Similarly, we distinguished between participants based on their direct involvement in the civil unrest following George Floyd’s murder. Participants were then asked whether they were employed on 25 May 2020, following the murder of George Floyd by selecting one of the following three responses: 1, “Yes, and I did respond to the civil unrest”; 2, “Yes, but I did not respond to civil unrest”; or 3, “No, I was not employed during this time”. For analysis, responses 2 and 3 were combined as “Not directly exposed to civil unrest” and compared with response 1 “Exposed directly to civil unrest”. Exposure to the civil unrest encompassed the widespread demonstrations across the Twin Cities metropolitan area, including Minneapolis and Saint Paul, that escalated into riots, looting, and violent encounters between police and protesters through verbal or physical threats (Galea and Abdalla, 2020). This approach allowed us to control for the differential impact of these stressors, ensuring that any observed differences in stress levels were not merely due to the presence of these events, but were reflective of the varied intensities of exposure experienced by participants. We believe this adjustment will allow us to better evaluate the impact of work-related stressors on both groups, in light of the varying levels of stressors introduced by these unprecedented events.

Statistical analyses

All analyses were conducted using STATA/IC version 15.1. Histograms and the Shapiro-Wilk’s W test for normality were conducted for each outcome variable (i.e. PSQ-Op, PSQ-Org, PTSD). A directed acyclic graph was constructed to determine the minimum set of confounders required to block all potentially confounding relations for each of the models (Carlson et al., 2006; Sun et al., 2017). We determined that age, race, gender, history of armed service, second job, having children, exposure to civil unrest, history of COVID-19 infection, job tenure, marital status, work shift, and department location were variables to adjust in the final models. Because of the low number of responders in the non-white race categories, we collapsed race into a dichotomous (white/non-white) variable for analysis to ensure anonymity and stable model estimates for sworn and non-sworn observations (Westreich and Cole, 2010). Multivariable linear regression models were conducted with each work-related stressor measure (PSQ-Op, PSQ-Org, PTSD) as the outcome and job classification as the primary independent variable.

Missing data were addressed using single-item imputation followed by multiple imputation with 10 iterations. A bias analysis was conducted to investigate the incentive effect of becoming eligible for pension benefits using a cutoff of 10 years for sworn and 5 years for non-sworn following the Minnesota pension qualification guidelines (Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association, 2022). Pension eligibility is a non-random factor that could bias the associations of interest by influencing personnel to stay employed regardless of how stressful the job is (Brown et al., 2017; Shah, 2009; Wei et al., 2017). We believe pension eligibility to be a concern because those who would have retired or quit may have continued to stay employed regardless of how stressful the job was and thus may display higher-than-expected levels of work-related stress. To better estimate the levels of work-related stress and risk of probable PTSD, the bias analysis investigated whether the study results differed among those who were not pension-eligible across all personnel (sworn and non-sworn).

Results

Study participation

A total of 1564 potentially eligible participants were employed at two different law enforcement agencies Minnesota (Figure 1). A total of 368 participated for a response rate of 24%. The final study sample consisted of 283 sworn personnel with a survey response rate of 30% and 85 non-sworn/civilian personnel with a survey response rate of 14%. Participants who did not indicate job classification were excluded from the study population.

Figure 1.

Participant flow diagram of study enrollment and analysis.

Participant demographics and work descriptors

Nearly 67% of participants were recruited from a police department and 33% were recruited from a sheriff’s department (Table 1). The study population was largely male (58%), white (83%), and not Hispanic/Latinx (86%). There were proportionally more sworn than non-sworn positions within the police department (84% vs 16%) compared with the sheriff’s department (63% vs 37%). There were slightly more males than females within the police department (71% vs 29%), compared with the sheriff’s department (55% vs 43%). The majority of the study population reported being married (65%), having one or more children (70%), not having a second job (69%), and did not report a history of serving in the US Armed Forces (92%). About 79% of the study population received the COVID-19 vaccine. The mean (SD) age for sworn and non-sworn personnel was 42.8 (±9.3) and 44.0 (±10.6) years, respectively. A total of 51 sworn (18%) and 13 non-sworn personnel (15%) reported testing positive for COVID-19. A total of 197 sworn personnel (70%) and 42 non-sworn personnel (49%) reported responding to the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd. The mean job tenure in years was 12.8 (±8.9) for sworn personnel and 10.0 (±9.4) for non-sworn personnel.

Table 1.

Participant demographics and information.

	Sworn		Non-sworn		Total sample
	(N = 283)		(N = 85)		(N = 368)
	n	%	n	%	n	%
Gender
Male	195	69	46	54	241	58
Female	84	30	39	46	123	33
Missing	4	1	0	0	4	1
Race
American Indian or Alaska Native	5	2	1	1	6	2
Asian or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Island	13	5	4	5	17	5
Black or African American	10	4	3	4	13	4
White	231	82	74	87	305	83
More than one race	15	5	1	1	16	4
Missing	9	3	2	2	11	3
Ethnicity
Not Hispanic or Latinx	243	86	74	87	317	86
Hispanic or Latinx	12	4	3	4	15	4
Missing	28	10	8	9	36	10
Marital status
Married	184	65	57	67	241	65
Single	94	33	27	32	121	33
Missing	5	2	1	1	6	2
Children
None	76	27	28	33	104	28
One or more	203	72	55	65	258	70
Missing	4	1	2	2	6	2
Second or off-duty job
Yes	102	36	9	11	111	30
No	179	63	74	87	253	69
Missing	2	1	2	2	4	1
History of active duty in the US Armed Forces
Yes	25	9	4	5	29	8
No	257	91	80	94	337	92
Missing	1	0.4	1	1	2	0.5
Work shift
8h	158	56	26	31	184	50
>8 hours	122	43	57	67	179	49
Missing	3	1	2	2	5	1
Law enforcement department
Police department	205	72	40	47	245	67
Sheriffs department	78	28	45	53	123	33
COVID-19 vaccine status
Received vaccine	224	79	67	79	291	79
Did not receive vaccine	55	19	15	18	70	19
Missing	4	1	3	4	7	2
COVID-19 infection
Tested positive	51	18	13	15	64	17
Tested negative	231	82	70	82	301	82
Missing	1	0	2	2	44	90
Employed during civil unrest
Yes, did respond	197	70	42	49	242	58
Yes, did not respond	82	29	40	47	124	30
No, not employed	4	1	3	4	7	2
Missing	0	0	0	0	44	11
Pension status*
Not eligible	60	21	46	54	106	25
Eligible	187	66	28	33	215	52
Missing	36	13	11	13	96	23
Job tenure in years
Mean (SD)	12.8 (8.9)		10.0 (9.4)		12.2 (9.1)
Age in years
Mean (SD)	42.8 (9.3)		44.0 (10.6)		43.1 (9.6)

SD = standard deviation.

^*Pension eligibility differed by job classification (e.g., ≥ 5 years for non-sworn, ≥ 10 years for sworn).

Note: A total of 49 respondents did not report job classification.

Stress levels and PTSD symptom severity across sworn and non-sworn personnel

Overall, the mean PCL-5 scores and work-related stress levels were similar between sworn and non-sworn personnel. The average organizational stress (PSQ-Org) scores were 67.4 ± 24.0 for non-sworn (n = 78; min = 23; max = 117) and 73.8 ± 21.6 for sworn personnel (n = 272; min = 21; max = 140) as shown in Figure 2. The mean score for PSQ-Org was 3.37 for non-sworn and 3.69 for sworn. The average operational stress (PSQ-Op) score were 66.8 ± 26.6 for non-sworn (n = 78; min = 20, max = 128) and 68.2 ± 23.0 for sworn personnel (n = 265; min = 23; max = 140). The mean score for PSQ-Op was 3.34 for non-sworn and 3.41 for sworn. Mean PCL-5 scores were 27.5 ± 19.8 for non-sworn (n = 37; min = 0; max = 67) and 22.2 ± 18.4 among sworn personnel (n = 158; min = 0; max = 77) indicating similar levels of PTSD symptom severity. A total of 43 (74%) sworn personnel and 15 (26%) civilian/non-sworn personnel met the cutoff score (PCL-5 = 31 or greater) for probable PTSD (Figure 3).

Figure 2.

Box plots comparison between sworn and non-sworn positions for operational stress (PSQ-Op) and organizational stress (PSQ-Org). The minimum value for the PSQ scale is 20 and the maximum value is 140.

Figure 3.

Box plot comparison between sworn and non-sworn positions for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom severity. *The vertical dashed line displays the cutoff score of 31 to indicate probable PTSD based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) PTSD criteria (Bovin et al., 2016). The maximum value on the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 scale is 80 and the minimum value is 0.

There were no significant differences in either operational [β = 0.90, confidence interval (CI) = −5.03, 6.83) or organizational stress (β = −5.1, CI = −10.74, 0.53) between sworn and non-sworn personnel (Table 2). Although not significant, upper bound of the confidence interval was just slightly above zero, suggesting lower organizational stress among non-sworn compared with sworn officers. However, there were no differences in PTSD symptom severity (β = 3.24, CI = −4.19, 10.67) by job classification.

Table 2.

Mean difference between job classification (non-sworn versus sworn) across post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom severity and work-related stress.

		95% Confidence interval
Outcome*	β †	Lower limit	Upper limit
Operational stress	0.90	−5.03	6.83
Organizational stress	−5.10	−10.74	0.53
PTSD symptom severity	3.24	−4.19	10.67

β = Mean difference.

^*Non-sworn versus sworn where sworn is the reference group in regression analysis.

^†Multivariable linear regression model.

Note: Each model was adjusted for age, race, gender, military history, and department location with sworn as the reference group.

Bias analysis: Stratification by pension eligibility for incentive effect

In a sensitivity analysis, the difference in mean organizational stress levels between sworn and non-sworn personnel (β = −10.1, CI = −18.84, −1.36) was greater among those who had not reached pension eligibility (e.g., < 5 years for non-sworn, < 10 years for sworn) compared with the full study cohort (Table 3). We explored to see whether meaningful differences between sworn and non-sworn personnel among the pension-eligible group for both operational and organizational stress scores indicated a unique interaction among personnel who remained in the profession. In the pension-eligible group, there was no substantive difference in operational stress levels and significant differences in organizational stress levels among the non-eligible pension group.

Table 3.

Bias analysis of job classification (non-sworn versus sworn) and probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and work-related stress.

Outcome*	Not eligible for pension			Eligible for pension
	(N = 145)			(N = 272)
	β †	95% Confidence interval		β †	95% Confidence interval
		LL	UL		LL	UL
Operational stress	−1.96	−11.26	7.33	6.63	−2.22	15.49
Organizational stress	−10.1	−18.84	−1.36	2.11	−6.48	10.71
Probable PTSD	8.91	−5.61	23.43	2.40	−7.58	12.39

β = Mean difference; LL = lower limit, UL = upper limit.

^*Non-sworn versus sworn where sworn is the reference group in regression analysis.

^†Multivariable linear regression model.

Note: Each model was adjusted for age, race, gender, military history, and department location with sworn as the referent group.

Discussion

This study is among the first to collect data on perceived work-related stressors and PTSD symptom severity among sworn and non-sworn law enforcement personnel during a global pandemic and heightened social awareness of police violence and racial injustice. Contrary to our study’s hypotheses, findings suggested that the levels of work-related stress and probable PTSD were generally comparable between sworn and non-sworn personnel. Overall, no differences in operational and organizational stress were found between sworn and non-sworn personnel, which was unexpected because of the inherent differences in job tasks. Non-sworn employees typically carry out tasks like record-keeping and administrative responsibilities, in contrast to sworn personnel out in the field who enforce the law and ensure public safety. According to Kiedrowski et al. (2019), civilian personnel are increasingly conducting job duties that formerly have been exclusively under the scope of police officers, such as providing technical support in forensic investigations or assisting in correctional facilities (Griffin, 2006; Mrevlje, 2016). These expanding roles, which may expose non-sworn personnel to stressors commonly experienced among sworn personnel, could explain why no differences in work-related stress were found in this study.

Another potential explanation for similar stress levels is that the support provided by non-sworn personnel does alleviate the stress experienced among sworn personnel. Sworn positions have historically included additional job responsibilities specific to fieldwork (patrolling, investigating crimes) that oftentimes conflict with their administrative job duties (submitting police reports of accidents or crimes in a timely manner). For instance, sworn personnel may feel overwhelmed in managing the demands to collect evidence from active crime scenes while upholding their primary function of responding to emergency calls at a moment’s notice. With the presence of civilian staff, certain job tasks (e.g., processing criminal evidence and traffic violations) can be delegated to non-sworn personnel to alleviate some of the demands of policing. Hence, sworn personnel may feel reduced levels of work-related stress while carrying out their primary functions of service and protection (Kiedrowski et al., 2019).

However, when stratified by pension eligibility, prominent differences are seen among early career professionals in which sworn personnel stress levels are substantially greater than those of their non-sworn counterparts. This study found that organizational stress was higher among sworn than non-sworn personnel, primarily among sworn officers before pension eligibility. This indicates that sworn personnel are sensitive to organizational stressors, particularly during the first 10 years of their careers as individuals navigate work-related stressors not commonly seen in civilian life while fulfilling the essential administrative obligations (Moriarty and Field, 1990).

As law enforcement agencies continue to employ civilians to support public safety and security efforts, it is imperative that agencies are prepared for impacts among non-sworn personnel who can be exposed to vicarious trauma in the workplace through activities like processing digital evidence of serious injury, death, suicide, or child-related fatalities in addition to traumatic scenes of violence (e.g., vehicle fatality) (Forst, 2000; Steinkopf et al., 2018; U.S. Department of Justice, 2019). Research in related fields has shown the effects of vicarious trauma among other professions (e.g., healthcare workers, firefighters, child protection services) witnessing damaging, terrible, and cruel circumstances (MacEachern et al., 2018). Furthermore, non-sworn study respondents in this study population also faced mandatory overtime during the city-wide unrest following the death of George Floyd under police custody. Operating under mandatory overtime likely placed non-sworn personnel in new and compromising work-related circumstances and possibly exacerbated exposure to vicarious trauma. These conditions may make non-sworn personnel particularly susceptible to developing symptoms of PTSD because of the likelihood of experiencing traumatic circumstances directly or indirectly throughout one’s career.

Because this study took place during a global pandemic and heightened public outcry against police violence, it was necessary to adjust for the different levels of exogenous factors: COVID-19 (infection) and direct response to civil unrest. Work-related stress due to COVID-19 and the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd have been shown to impact mental health and stress levels among law enforcement personnel (Bradley, 2021; Stogner et al., 2020; Tehrani, 2022). A significant proportion of participants (58%) reported responding to the civil unrest, whereas a majority (79%) had received the COVID-19 vaccine with a small proportion (17%) of the study population testing positive. These factors have the potential to influence work-related stress and the likelihood of experiencing PTSD across all law enforcement personnel. The COVID-19 pandemic, along with the sub-sequent civil unrest, has introduced unique and exceptional sources of stress that have had a profound impact on policing. These stressors include negative public interactions and the heightened risk of infection. Law enforcement personnel have been faced with the challenge of safeguarding the health and safety of the community, which has necessitated direct contact with individuals suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19. Furthermore, the protests against police-related violence in Minnesota garnered national attention and exposed law enforcement personnel to traumatic scenes of burning buildings, looting, and verbal threats. Research has shown that both the civil unrest and the COVID-19 pandemic are stressful events that can be experienced by both community members and law enforcement, and the levels of stress reported here are similar to that reported when compared with other police officers during non-pandemic times (PSQ-Op: 3.41 vs 3.26; PSQ-Org: 3.69 vs 3.53) (Galovski et al., 2016; Garbarino et al., 2012; Hou et al., 2022; McCreary et al., 2017; Violanti, 2014). The study, however, focuses on a comparison of stress levels between the two law enforcement groups (mean differences) against the backdrop of the global pandemic and recent social upheaval.

Limitations

This study also had some notable limitations. The study design could not determine the temporal relationships between exposures and outcomes. Recall bias could have influenced results because the study was conducted months after the height of COVID-19 cases and civil unrest. Because of the small sample size, our bias analysis could not examine incentive bias across shorter intervals of job tenure as commonly done in occupational health research. Study findings are also based on two law enforcement agencies located in Minnesota where the geographic, political, and cultural contexts may not be generalizable to other law enforcement departments in the USA or internationally.

Conclusion

In summary, sworn personnel reported more organizational sources of stress early in their careers than non-sworn personnel, and sworn and non-sworn personnel reported similar levels of both organizational and operational stress after reaching pension eligibility. The similarity in stress levels suggests that non-sworn personnel are just as vulnerable to work-related stress as their sworn counterparts. Addressing stressors experienced by both sworn and non-sworn law enforcement personnel is important for several reasons. First, it helps to maintain the health and wellness of both workgroups, which is crucial for their overall health and ability to perform their duties effectively. Second, addressing stressors can help to improve relationships between personnel and the communities they serve. Finally, addressing stressors can help to prevent negative outcomes such as suicide, substance abuse, and other mental health issues among both sworn and non-sworn personnel (Violanti, 2014). Findings underscore a need for enhanced mental health services for both sworn and non-sworn officers.

Biographies

Author biographies

Yoon-Sung Nam holds a PhD in environmental health sciences, specializes in public health surveillance and epidemiology driven by the philosophy that “injuries are not accidents”. With a primary focus on preventing and controlling occupational injuries, his expertise encompasses epidemiological surveillance, health practices, and workplace-related violence. His comprehensive training uniquely positions him to offer holistic insights into the intricate field of occupational health, prioritizing safety and well-being in work environments.

Patricia A. Frazier is the Director of Graduate Studies in Psychology, a Distinguished McKnight University Professor, and oversees the Stress and Trauma Lab at the University of Minnesota. Her research explores the impact of stress and trauma, investigating negative outcomes like depression and anxiety, as well as factors contributing to resilience. Dr Frazier also pioneers technology-based interventions, specifically addressing student mental health in her current research at the College of Liberal Arts.

Susan Everson-Rose is a distinguished professor in the Department of Medicine at the University of Minnesota, holding multiple leadership roles, including Associate Director for Research in General Internal Medicine. With over 25 years of research, Dr Everson-Rose’s work reveals the impact of stress, emotions, and socioeconomic factors on cardiovascular health, cognitive decline, cancer-related behaviors, and overall well-being. As a National Institutes of Health-funded investigator, she contributes to major cohort studies and leads initiatives on evidence-based stress management and mindfulness interventions for diverse populations.

Hyun Kim, an epidemiologist, currently serves as the director for the Midwest Center for Occupational Health and Safety, Occupational Injury Prevention Research Program at the University of Minnesota. Collaborating with the World Health Organization, Dr Kim conducts fieldwork in disaster-affected areas. Notable projects include vulnerability assessments in Fiji, Tuvalu, and Kiribati, and leading Green Climate Fund proposals. His current research examines the long-term public health impact of disasters like the World Trade Center attacks and Hurricane Sandy.

Andrew D Ryan serves as the Midwest Center Occupational Health and Safety database manager, statistical analyst, and senior research fellow at the Division of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health. His multifaceted role involves overseeing occupational health, managing databases, and conducting statistical analyses. As a senior research fellow, Mr Ryan contributes to advancing research initiatives within the division, showcasing his expertise and commitment to promoting health and safety.

Marizen R Ramirez currently holds the position of Associate Dean of Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity at the University of California-Irvine Program in Public Health. Dr Ramirez’s impactful career includes developing injury prevention curricula, securing grants addressing trauma in marginalized communities, and leading the Midwest Center for Occupational Health and Safety since 2019. Dr Ramirez has held esteemed positions at multiple universities and is recognized for her significant contributions to public health research, particularly in the field of injury prevention.